Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
4 Pages123Next pageLast page
 

Starlifter Tech I and Starlifter Vanguard Tech II Transport Ship

Author
Minmatar Republic
#1 - 2017-02-12 03:29:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Ronnie Rose
[Original Post]
Hi,

I would rather send it directly to CCP rather than post it the forum. I wrote a word document about this ship too. It's not a combat ship that you could fight other players with, but a transport ship that could change a good amount of things that would make EVE even much more interesting. And even though you could not fight with this ship, it would have a military support role that could tip the scale in battle.

[Edited 16 February 2017 for readability - e.g. copied and pasted from a later post in this thread]
Okay.

SOE and the ORE Corporation has collaborated on a ship concept that's been sitting on ORE's drafting table for years. ORE believe it would revolutionize Industrial transport and shipping but they would not commit the design to production because it was too much of a risk to pilots being that ORE's, like other industrial ship are bulky and slow.

That was until SOE made an engineering breakthrough with the use of a new hull material technology called Quantum Spatial Phasing (QSP). The technical details about how QSP works will be explained in my story. But, for now it was the technology that ORE was looking for to make their ship concept a reality.

The new class of ships SOE and ORE are designing is called Starlifters, and what the hull design allows the capuleer to do is carry other capsuleer pods in its cargo hold. In other words the Starlifter is a transport ship for other capuleers and their packaged ships. It's a concept that doesn't exist with any other ship in EVE.

The reason why ORE was reluctant to produce a transport ship like this was because they knew a passenger transport ship would be just as vulnerable as any other indy ship, and the idea of a ship kill transporting other pilots was not very marketable. But QSP will change that.

There are two version of the Starlifter space craft, a regular Tech I version and a Tech II military version called the Vanguard.

Now, QSP also has some very special benefits unique to the Starlifter because of its effects on warp field mechanics (there are also draw backs too, I but I can explain those later). Here are a few.

1. A pilot can drop out of warp at any time before they arrive at their destination.
2. Its hull material makes the ship extremely fast and agile for an industrial ship.
3. The ship has an emergency warp function that allows the pilot to warp off in the direction it is facing almost immediately.
4. You cannot scan this ship down with combat probes because of its QSP technology.
5. The tech one version is modestly effected by warp interdiction sphere's while the Vangard is immune.

But most important to ORE is that QSP significantly delays Ladar, Magetometric, Gravemetric and Radar targeting sensors when locking onto a Starlifter. We're talking anywhere from an 8 to 14 seconds target lock delay on a Starlifter depending on the Starlifter's pilot skills.

What this all means is a ship concept that allow's it's pilot to be extremely evasive to targeting, which means a better chance to survive gate camps, and give a pilot a chance to explore the farthest reaches of low or null sec space.

Here's where it gets interesting. The military version, the Vanguard is able to perform in-flight warp drops of its payload. Basically, the Starlifter is the EVE equivalent of the very real and very capable C-17 Globemaster III (Google it).

Now here are some of it's drawbacks.

1. There are no high slots on the Starlifter because the higher power requirements disrupts the QSP technology.
2. Ship modules, fits or modifications that would affect it's signature or cargo capacity will also adversely affect its QSP technology, so no microwarp drives or cargo expanders, etc.

and finally, SOE and ORE do not want to enable the criminal enterprise that would interfere with their commercial interests, so they would work with CONCORD to restrict pilots with a security standing of -5 or lower from flying the ship in high or low sec (criminal pilots can still fly a Starlifter in null or worm hole space). Further more, SOE and ORE would offer a Starlifter pilot's licenses through their LP store, which are required for flying Starlifters in high and low sec space (some restrictions apply, but I can explain that later).

And finally, here are some other interesting abilities the Starlifter offers.

1. The Starlifter would offer a whole new way for pilots to earn ISK by serving as "airline" pilots basically.

2. Passengers on board do not appear in the local chat channel or in the ship overview. This opens up for some interesting clandestine travel as a service though New Eden.

3. The in flight Warp drop opens up a whole new possibility in military logistics support and battlefront staging for war campaigns

That's pretty much, it in a nut shell. Wrote about ten pages of description, to include load mechanics, doctrine uses, visual effects descriptions, even the new type of scams, challenges for better or worse that the Starlifter would bring to EVE.

I have more but I'll just stop for now.

We're not here to change the game, we're here to change YOUR game

End of Life
#2 - 2017-02-12 04:13:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Nothing prevents you from sending it directly to CCP. Whether or not they will pay much attention to it is another thing.

This forum is specifically created by CCP, primarily for players to make suggestions or put forth ideas that they feel may improve EVE.

Concepts such as 'change a good amount of things' and 'make EVE much more interesting' are pretty subjective and something that has a 'military support role' could probably benefit from broader discussion.

My suggestion would be post the basic idea here in order to refine it (and as a litmus test of whether it really will achieve what you are hoping to propose and if it fills a gap not already covered by other hulls) and then if there is anything worth incorporating into your Word file, add it before posting the idea more broadly (eg. reddit, twitter or uploaded and made available here)
#3 - 2017-02-12 04:23:08 UTC
Also be braced from harsh criticism. As you will most assuredly receive it .
#DeleteTheWeak
Minmatar Republic
#4 - 2017-02-12 04:51:22 UTC
Valkin Mordirc wrote:
Also be braced from harsh criticism. As you will most assuredly receive it .


That's why I would rather not post it here in the forum but send it to CCP. If they think it warrant's discussion and exploration of the concept they can post the ideas (after making some adjustments, I'm sure)

We're not here to change the game, we're here to change YOUR game

Minmatar Republic
#5 - 2017-02-12 05:06:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Ronnie Rose
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Nothing prevents you from sending it directly to CCP. Whether or not they will pay much attention to it is another thing.

This forum is specifically created by CCP, primarily for players to make suggestions or put forth ideas that they feel may improve EVE.

Concepts such as 'change a good amount of things' and 'make EVE much more interesting' are pretty subjective and something that has a 'military support role' could probably benefit from broader discussion.

My suggestion would be post the basic idea here in order to refine it (and as a litmus test of whether it really will achieve what you are hoping to propose and if it fills a gap not already covered by other hulls) and then if there is anything worth incorporating into your Word file, add it before posting the idea more broadly (eg. reddit, twitter or uploaded and made available here)


I do appreciate good feedback. I've pretty much refined it to the point I've limited the concept as much possible to prevent or avoid exploits with such a concept (of course I can't think of all things). For example the ship concept is too 'powerful' to allow it to fight (which would not be its role anyway) so I would propose there would be no high slots available on the ship (which would probably be a first for eve, not counting shuttles or pods).

I'll offer a hint. The concept is modeled after a very real world application that people experience everyday, so it could be a natural fit in EVE to have its equivalent in the game.

And to add game lore to the idea I would propose the concept is a (secretive) joint venture between the Sisters of EVE (SOE) and Outer Rim Expedition (ORE)

We're not here to change the game, we're here to change YOUR game

#6 - 2017-02-12 05:11:54 UTC
the fact that you don't even have enough confidence in the idea to post it speaks volumes
Minmatar Republic
#7 - 2017-02-12 05:13:40 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
the fact that you don't even have enough confidence in the idea to post it speaks volumes

EVE is scary, but I play it anyway.

The key is to weigh the risks, so you've misjudged my caution as lack of confidence

We're not here to change the game, we're here to change YOUR game

CODE.
#8 - 2017-02-12 05:19:19 UTC
What risk

There once was a ganker named tisi

A stunningly beautiful missy

To gank a gross miner

There is nothing finer, cept when they get all pissy

Minmatar Republic
#9 - 2017-02-12 05:23:23 UTC
Tisiphone Dira wrote:
What risk


Every time I undock...

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=491023

BTW I'm really encouraged you responded to my thread =)

We're not here to change the game, we're here to change YOUR game

#10 - 2017-02-12 05:49:58 UTC
what does that have to do with you presenting your idea?
End of Life
#11 - 2017-02-12 06:03:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Ronnie Rose wrote:
Valkin Mordirc wrote:
Also be braced from harsh criticism. As you will most assuredly receive it .


That's why I would rather not post it here in the forum but send it to CCP. If they think it warrant's discussion and exploration of the concept they can post the ideas (after making some adjustments, I'm sure)

There is nothing to be afraid of with robust discussion.

It'll happen at some point anyway. Either your idea can stand on its merits or it can't. If it can't then discussion here can help you refine and improve it. If it can, then you'll end up with more support and evidence you can point CCP towards.

tbh, sending directly to CCP is probably the worst way you could go. A better approach would be to approach a CSM member. The best approach is to post it here and then approach a CSM member after discussion.
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2017-02-12 08:23:17 UTC
I keep be of agree with other posters, sounds like you are after direct feedback and if CCP end up not going with your idea it is unlikely you would get anything more than a short courtesy note rather than feedback.

If you do post here I would suggest sticking to more general concepts. Role ship class, general theme of any specific bonus modules, you do not need to post slot config, fittings, mass etc. The more detail you provide the more it will get picked over whereas you really need general approval of concept and CCP will come up with the rest.

Good luck.
#13 - 2017-02-12 09:44:42 UTC
In the past, when players try to send ideas directly to ccp, they get directed to here.

Most ideas are judged harshly, but most ideas have not been thought through at all. Many are petty 'i wants' and 'i hate. so it should be nerfed!' or 'its in for WoW so...'. Many are baseless, or based on outright lies. Many are the 'antithesis' of EVE. Many haven't searched for their idea to see if there's already a thread on it open.

Generally, if you demonstrate you have thought your idea through, are open to feedback, answer rebuttles honestly and explain why you think its going to make the game better, any initial harshless tends to fizzle out quickly.

Oh, and always use the search function.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Minmatar Republic
#14 - 2017-02-13 03:30:09 UTC
I've read your comments and I appreciate the sound replies. I've decided to take a creative approach and weave my idea into a story. I just posted the first part of several. I hope you all like it.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=511069&find=unread

cheers!Big smile

We're not here to change the game, we're here to change YOUR game

#15 - 2017-02-13 06:40:44 UTC
why not just plainly explain your idea?
#16 - 2017-02-13 11:14:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Van Doe
Ronnie Rose wrote:
Hi,

I would rather send it directly to CCP rather than post it the forum. I wrote a word document about this ship too. It's not a combat ship that you could fight other players with, but a transport ship that could change a good amount of things that would make EVE even much more interesting. And even though you could not fight with this ship, it would have a military support role that could tip the scale in battle.


Na it's absolutely illegal.
Ccp will perma ban you and your family.
And at night they will haunt you for the rest of your life.

Did you ever heard of the kid forced in to slave labor in the basement of ccps hq?

He once send a email directly to ccp.
Rumors say he only send a happy birthday to ccps 10th birthday

I'm not trolling, I create content for everyone to enjoy. afk cloaky in a system near you while posting in this forum.

#17 - 2017-02-13 13:28:44 UTC
OP I'd rather you just lay out your idea for the ship
Goonswarm Federation
#18 - 2017-02-13 13:35:19 UTC
There is absolutely no content in this post and OP is not open to discussing his idea.

Guess what that mean.
#19 - 2017-02-13 13:40:56 UTC
The other thing that happens in f&i is if you don't post a feature or idea your thread gets locked....

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

O.U.Z.O. Alliance
#20 - 2017-02-13 13:43:15 UTC
I am very glad that we are at least in range to execute this function again. /thread

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

4 Pages123Next pageLast page
Forum Jump